What is a Demurrer?

Useful Rulings on Demurrer

Recent Rulings on Demurrer

1-25 of 10000 results

ANGELA WATSON VS GILBERT A. CABOT

(Demurrer 13:9-12.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

NORMAN COLAVINCENZO V. SHELTERBOX USA, INC., ET AL.

Nature of Proceedings: Demurrer to First Amended Complaint Tentative

  • Hearing

    Sep 28, 2020

ALVARO GALLEGOS, ET AL. VS LUCIANO GOMEZ, JR.

.: 20STCV01969 Hearing Date: September 23, 2020 Defendants’ demurrer is SUSTAINED in part, OVERRULED in part. Defendants’ demurrer is OVERRULED as to the seventh, eighth, and twelfth causes of action. Defendants’ demurrer is SUSTAINED, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, as to the first, third, fifth, ninth, tenth, and thirteenth. Accordingly, Defendants’ motion to strike is MOOT. On January 16, 2020, Plaintiffs Alvaro Gallegos, Jose L.

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

BARBARA SANCHEZ V. DOES 1 THROUGH 100 INCLUSIVE, ET AL.

The demurrer to the fifth cause of action will be sustained. This is a demurrer to plaintiff’s original complaint and, as indicated above, the demurrer is sustained based upon the lack of allegations which plaintiff should reasonably be able to supply. The demurrer will be sustained with leave to amend. Because the demurrer is sustained to each cause of action of the complaint as to NuSil, the motion to strike is moot.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

BARBARA SANCHEZ V. DOES 1 THROUGH 100 INCLUSIVE, ET AL.

Nature of Proceedings: Demurrer to Complaint (2); Motion Strike (2) Tentative

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

HAGOP OGANIAN VS ZABEL OGANIAN

Plaintiffs do not oppose the demurrer, which is sustained. LEGAL STANDARD “It is black letter law that a demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the allegations in a complaint.” (Lewis v. Safeway, Inc. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 385, 388.) In ruling on a demurrer, the court must “liberally construe[]” the allegations of the complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 452.) “This rule of liberal construction means that the reviewing court draws inferences favorable to the plaintiff, not the defendant.” (Perez v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY VS VIRGINIA SUMUANO PEREZ, ET AL.

However, because special demurrers are not allowed in courts of limited jurisdiction the Court will not rule on the demurrer for uncertainty. (Code Civ. Proc., § 92, subd. (c).) As to Defendants’ contention that the Complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to state a cause of action, the face page of the Complaint plainly states this is an action brought by a subrogated insurer under Cal. Insurance Code section 11580.2 and for property damages. Cal.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ANNA RIZHAVSKAYA VS AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC.

CASE NO: 20VECV00662 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEMURRER TO THE COMPLAINT NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Dept. T 8:30 a.m. Demurrer Hearing: 9/22/2020 New CMC Dept. T 8:30 a.m. CMC 2/4/2021 [TENTATIVE] ORDER: A. The Demurrer to the Complaint is OVERRULED. Answer to complaint to be filed within 20 days. B. The Case Management Conference is continued to 2/4/2021 at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. T. New CMC statements are required per Local Rules.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

JOSEPH POPP VS VALLEYWIDE ESCROW, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

For the purpose of a motion to strike, the Code of Civil Procedure defines a "pleading" as a demurrer, answer, complaint, or cross-complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (a)(2).) Irrelevant allegations include: allegations that are not essential to the statement of a claim, allegations that are not pertinent to or supported by the claim, and demands for judgment requesting relief not supported by the allegations. (Code Civ. Proc., § 431.10, subd. (b), (c).)

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ANDRE NEUMANN V. GISELA . NEUMANN, ET AL.

He could have addressed the substance of the demurrer but chose not to. There is no cause for a continuance. 3. Demurrer Standards: The court’s only task in ruling on a demurrer is to determine whether the complaint states a cause of action. Moore v. Regents of University of California, 51 Cal.3d 120, 125 (1990).

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

JEAN-BAPTISTE YAPO V. NUSIL TECHNOLOGY LLC

Nature of Proceedings: Demurrer A First Amended complaint was filed on 9/8/2020, the Demurrer is moot and the hearing is off calendar.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

CHAN VS. TRANQUILITY, INC.

* TENTATIVE RULING: in light of the Court’s ruling on the companion demurrer, Defendant’s motion to compel is moot, See Line 4 below.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Burch

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CHAN VS. TRANQUILITY, INC.

* TENTATIVE RULING: * In light of the Court’s ruling on the companion demurrer, Defendant’s Motion to Strike is moot. See Line 4 below.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Burch

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CHAN VS. TRANQUILITY, INC.

HEARING ON DEMURRER TO 2nd Amended COMPLAINT FILED BY TRANQUILITY, INC. * TENTATIVE RULING: * Defendant’s general demurrer is moot as to the First, Second, and Third Causes of Action, and is sustained without leave to amend as to all remaining causes of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) This ruling disposes of the entire action.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Burch

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

WEEKLY VS. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE

Also, like a demurrer, a motion for judgment on the pleadings does not lie as to only part of a cause of action. (Fire Ins. Exch. v. Sup. Ct. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 446, 452; Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civ. Pro. Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2008) p. 7:295.) Factual and Procedural Background On January 23, 2007 Lucille Weekly obtained a mortgage loan for $502,200 from SCME Mortgage Bankers, Inc. (RJN Ex. 1.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Burch

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

DANIELS VS WELLS FARGO BANK

The demurrer will be sustained without leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

NASSIRI V. TOYOTA FINANCIAL SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

Demurrer to Complaint The Demurrer of Defendant Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, erroneously sued as The Demurrer by Toyota Financial Services International Corporation (“Defendant”), to the Complaint of Plaintiff Hamid Nassiri is continued to October 26, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. in Department C32 to allow Defendant the opportunity to serve the Demurrer – as well as a notice of the continuance of the hearing – to Plaintiff’s correct address.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

GMP LABORATORIES OF AMERICA, INC. V. METAFORMULA INTERNATIONAL, INC.

Demurrer to Second Amended Complaint The Demurrer by Defendant Metaformula International Corp. (“Metaformula” or “Defendant”) to the Fourth Cause of Action in the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) is SUSTAINED. “A quantum meruit or quasi-contractual recovery rests upon the equitable theory that a contract to pay for services rendered is implied by law for reasons of justice.” (Hedging Concepts, Inc. v. First Alliance Mortgage Co. (1996) 41 Cal.App.4th 1410, 1419).

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY NORMANDIYA VS TECHSON ELECTRONICS, INC.

THE COURT ORDERS CLERK OF THE COURT TO ENTER A JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO CCP SECTION 581(f)(2) IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF FOR FAILING TO AMEND AFTER DEMURRER WAS SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. THE DEMURRER WAS SUSTAINED ON 6/29/2020 WITH 20 DAYS LEAVE TO AMEND. NOTICE WAS GIVEN BY THE CLERK OF THE COURT ON 6/29/2020. THE AMENDED COMPLAINT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED BY 7/24/2020. NO AMENDED COMPLAINT HAS BEEN FILED.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

RYNO MANUFACTURING, LLC VS. EKLUND

Demurrer to Second Amended Complaint. Moving Party Defendants Sean Eklund and Electrolurgy Manufacturing, Inc. Responding Party Plaintiff Ryno Manufacturing, LLC. Opposition filed. Ruling: Defendants’ Demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint of Plaintiff Ryno Manufacturing, LLC, is OVERRULED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10(e).) First Cause of Action (Negligence).

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

SALISBURY GROUP, INC. V. EDALAT

Demurrer to Cross-Complaint – OVERRULED Cross-Defendants Salisbury Group, Inc.’s and Lisa Gerard Salisbury’s demurrer to Cross-Complainant Paul Edalat’s Cross-Complaint is overruled. Cross-Defendants are ordered to file and serve their Answer to the Cross-Complaint within ten days. A demurrer presents an issue of law regarding the sufficiency of the allegations set forth in the complaint. (Lambert v. Carneghi (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 1120, 1126.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

ROBERT LEEBURG, ET AL. VS TEMIDAYO AKINYEMI, ET AL.

(Demurrer at p. 9.) But a demurrer is not the place for contesting the accuracy of the factual assertions made in a Complaint, as a demurrer in fact assumes the truth of the Complaint’s allegations. (See Hahn, supra, 147 Cal.App.4th at p. 747.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

WEST 43RD PLACE, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ET AL.

Defendant City of Los Angeles’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED with 30 days leave to amend as to the second, third, fourth, and sixth causes of action. It is otherwise OVERRULED. DEMURRER A demurrer should be sustained only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed. (Code Civ. Pro., §§ 430.30, et seq.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

MIDLAND ENTERTAINMENT LLC VS HYDRA GROUP LLC ET AL

Midland responds that Newton’s counsel seeks to double-bill for duplicative tasks, such as 46.7 hours sought in connection with the demurrer to the SAC, which was sustained on pleading-particularity grounds previously hashed out in other demurrers, plus an additional 5.6 hours purportedly spent preparing a proposed judgment, and 43 hours of time spent on the present fee motion. (Opposition at pp. 13–14.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ERNEST CUADRA VS FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ET AL.

In opposition, Plaintiff argues that Fedex’s motion must be overruled because a demurrer seeking abatement is not proper when one action is pending in federal court and the other in state court. (Opposition, 4-6.) Plaintiff relies on Gregg v. Superior Court (1987) 194 Cal.App.3d 134, 136 for this argument (Gregg).

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.